Incoherent, authoritarian, uninformed: Trump’s New York Times interview is a scary read

It would be comforting, on some level, to believe that Trump is simply lying, that he is trying to convince us of what he knows to be untrue.
It is scarier to believe that Trump is delusional, that he has persuaded himself that Democrats have said things they’ve never said, that his base
has strengthened when it has actually weakened, that it’s really his opponents under investigation for collusion, that his campaign has been cleared
of wrongdoing when the circumstantial case for collusion has only grown stronger.

But that is far from the end of the interview.

Trump: “I have absolute right to do what I want to do with the Justice Department”

A few paragraphs later, for instance, Trump offers this chilling comment when asked about Hillary Clinton’s emails (which, amazingly, we are somehow
still talking about in December 2017):

NYT: You control the Justice Department. Should they reopen that email investigation?

TRUMP: What I’ve done is, I have absolute right to do what I want to do with the Justice Department. But for purposes of hopefully thinking I’m
going to be treated fairly, I’ve stayed uninvolved with this particular matter.

Read Trump’s phrasing carefully: “I have absolute right to do what I want to do with the Justice Department.” It’s a statement that speaks
both to Trump’s yearning for authoritarian power and his misunderstanding of the system in which he actually operates.

And it’s followed by something yet scarier. “For purposes of hopefully thinking I’m going to be treated fairly, I’ve stayed uninvolved with
this particular matter,” he says. www.vox.com...

I know Trumpers don't mind Trump lying like crazy or making absurd claims, but his comment quoted above about the Justice Department has to bother all
Trump supporters in my view. Consider the following moments from recent history.

In this video, Trump asserts that he would have the power as POTUS to put Hillary Clinton behind bars.

I thought locking Hillary Clinton up was one of the things Trumpers cared about most. Therefore, I would think they would care about whether Trump has
the absolute right to do what he wants with the Justice Department.

She's a war criminal traitor who partnered with Al Qaeda (who attacked the WTC with airplanes full of passengers) the opium heroin drug running
international narcoterrorism cartel, to overthrow the Syrian government, and caused the deaths of at least 480,000 people.

So she should be put in jail (to put it over the top lightly).

Trump last month was the first POTUS in history to have the DOD start bombing Al Qaeda's opium heroin drug labs in Afghanistan.

See here the US heroin overdose deaths triple during her partnership with Al Qaeda, the "moderate rebels"TERRORISTS who run
the global heroin supply:

One of my best friends I grew up with was one of them.

You should be counting your lucky stars he hasn't sicked DOJ on her bare knuckle with accompanying media blitz.

President Trump is doing the right thing. He is letting it all unravel itself. He's right. The president holds a great deal of power over the
Justice Dept., but he is standing back and letting everything fall into place as the investigation reveals more and more of what the Obama
administration was really up to.

Considering the levels of obvious corruption in all the departments with Obama and Hillary holdouts, Trump should just do whatever he wants with all
of them. I agree. Wipe the scum out any way he can. Use the military even and burn them out.

I love how the left clings to "But it's authoritarianism" with Trump, but when it was Obama targeting opposition and using party loyalists in the DoJ
and the IRS to go after opposition politically (and illegally), they were happy about that.

I love how the left clings to "But it's authoritarianism" with Trump, but when it was Obama targeting opposition and using party loyalists in the DoJ
and the IRS to go after opposition politically (and illegally), they were happy about that.

I hope Trump destroys them all.

It's part of the mental illness called Liberalism.....it's only ok when they do it.

The Justice department is under the Executive branch. It is the enforcement of laws, which is what the President is mandated to do, enforces the
laws. However, there are rules that are put in place that keeps a healthy distance between the President and the Justice department at all times.
And those rules are there for good reason.

Before the Nixon administration there were no rules that set a wall between the Justice and the President’s office, there was stuff that went on
between both areas, intermingling. In the past is well known that the FBI and the justice worked for and protected the President. JFK comes to mind,
with his numerous affairs, the FBI kept such silent and would clean that up. But when Nixon came into office, he used it for his own political gains
going after his political rivals. Watergate came up and when it was determined that the justice department, in specifically the FBI was partly
involved, that when they refused, that another group comprised of ex FBI and CIA persons were involved, (the plumbers). Then came the Saturday Night
Massacre, where the Attorney General, and the Assistant Attorney General refused to dismiss and fire the special prosecutor. In fact it took a bit of
finding and when that man was found who did dismiss and get rid of the special prosecutor, the congress took action and started impeachment
proceedings against the sitting president, and a new investigator was brought in to continue on.

After the entire Watergate scandal, rules were carefully enacted to restrict the access and role of the President with the Justice Department and the
FBI. No one wanted to have a president with unlimited power or authority to do what he wants for that exact reason. And every administration has
reviewed those walls and rules, sometimes they are weakened, only for new rules to be put into place to strengthen that wall.

In short the President should not have such unfettered access to that department as he feels he needs, but it should remain where the only people who
need to talk to him, would be the Director of the FBI or even the Attorney General and very few on both sides communicating. That is what should
remain as it is and not be changed.

Now I am not saying that the man is going to abuse his position of authority, however, I do not think it would be a wise idea if he did.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.